Conservativism and Morality (Cathryn Crawford)

Last week, after I wrote my column on conservativism, I received a considerable amount of mail telling me about the things that I neglected to say. It seemed a common consensus among the Republicans that I spoke too little about specific things like abortion, gun control, and free speech; and too much about general, basic beliefs.

I thought about these comments a lot, and I considered doing a column that addressed these specific issues each in turn – but then I realized that there is one basic belief that underscores and supports conservative beliefs, including all these. As a matter of fact, it is an excellent summation of conservativism.

Conservative people have a moral compass that they, whether they live by it or not, acknowledge. They recognize and believe that all social questions, all government issues, can be traced back to a question of private morality. Conservatives have a strong belief that societies that are governed by people who are in turn governed by a strong moral compass are, in fact, better societies. They believe that a good government, a legitimate government, is one that is based on the conservative principles of justice, honesty, and honor.

This moral compass is what drives the main tenets of conservativism. Citizens with strong moral beliefs are less likely to act for the instant gratification of desires – therefore, they are less willing to advocate frivolous and excessive spending on programs that are unnecessary. They have – or should have – a stronger work ethic and more independent inclinations – and this translates into a desire for a smaller government. They don’t feel that they need a government to take care of them. They are more independent – minded.

This may sound like a general, feel-good statement, but it’s the core of conservativism. Conservatives hold their own to a higher standard. While we expect immoral ( an old fashioned word, but still relevant) behavior from those that we know are not guided by a moral compass, let a conservative commit a crime or even an act generally accepted to be “bad”, and conservatives will be the first to point it out and call them out on it. Think Bill Bennett, and, to a lesser extent, Trent Lott. As a matter of fact, conservatives tend to carry it to the other extreme – their attacks on their own are more brutal than their attacks on those whom they hold to a different standard.

This moral standing – moral compass – is why the conservatives of America want to see less government rather than more. They believe that as government grows, so does its capacity to be corrupt. They believe that government will eventually grow to such a capacity that it will take away the liberty of the citizens. They also believe that this liberty is more important to protect than social norms or social consensus. Barry Goldwater sums this up in this paragraph from his book, The Conscience of a Conservative:

"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is 'needed' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' interests, I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can."

In closing, while the conservatives of America have their pet issues that they consider to be the nearest and dearest of their ideology, their real defining belief is in the strong ethical and moral foundation that their tenets were originally founded on. All the strong positions on gun rights, abortion, free speech – all can be traced back to moral reasoning. The Constitution itself was originally founded on moral beliefs about the best way a government would serve its citizens. Morality is not just a part of conservativism – morality is conservatism.

Cathryn Crawford is a student at the University of Texas. She can be reached at cathryncrawford@washingtondispatch.com

Excellent piece. Thank you. JMO, but I believe you postulate the ideal; morality is conservatism. This is true for the traditionally valued conservative. Secular society has seemed to blur the lines however. We now seem to have social conservatism and political conservatism and they don't always tend to aim or arrive at the same destination. Our republic founded upon Judeo/Christian values was privilaged to have a group of people, steeped in those values which penned the greatest document man has devised to govern a society based upon equality and fraternity, thereby allowing any within that society to strive and achieve based upon the effort any particular individual wished to exert, or not as the case may be. That Constitution and Bill of Rights set forth the basic tenants of our republic. The rights and responsibilities laid forth in that document are as valid today as the day they were written.

However, our secular society, today has gorged upon the rights and at the same time seems to want to forget the responsibilites that go along with them, regardless of which political label the individual labels himself.

We don't need to re-invent the wheel. It is all there for us to follow and yet we don't. The solution is to follow our Constitution as written and not keep tampering with this article or that to fit our situation. I am not sure we can get back from whence we came.

Ben Franklin opined, and I paraphrase. This great experiment of government, of, for, and by the people, will only work until "the people" believe they can vote themselves anything they like. Unfortunately I believe we crossed that Rubicon years ago.

There was an interesting question postulated: "Can a liberal be moral?" It is a good question. And can a moral person be liberal, is also a good question. Liberalism in it's inception wasn't immoral. However, just as Constitutional conservatism seems to have been hijacked, so it seems has liberalism (today called progressivism).

Here is a link to an interesting thread I bookmarked a couple of years ago that you might find an interesting read. I know I did. It took me some re-reading to grasp it all, but when I did it was illuminating.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/621855/posts

I enjoy reading your commentary. Keep up the excellent work.

"No man is a good citizen unless he so acts as to show that he actually uses the Ten Commandments, and translates the Golden Rule into his life conduct." --Theodore Roosevelt
"The moral principles and precepts contained in the scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws. All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible." Noah Webster, compiler of the American Dictionary of the English Language in 1828.
“We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us ... to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” -James Madison
Patrick Henry said "Bad men cannot make good citizens. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience are incompatible with freedom."
"Men are qualified for liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites." --Edmund Burke

A few quotations for your reading pleasure.

A question. Can Conservatives swell their ranks with new non-traditional (not religious) numbers without relinquishing Moral Absolutes?

Moral absolutes are actually almost the same in every monotheist tradition. I am very familiar with the Vedic tradition (the scriptures that are the foundation for what is known as Hinduism) and the moral absolutes that are the foundation of Judaism and Christianity are virtually the same. Even Buddhism which is not theistic still has similar moral precepts. The main difference with Buddhism and Vedic principles and Judeo-Christian principles is that Buddhism and the Vedas place more stress on mercy to all including animals. On sexual morality, honesty, truth telling, respect for elders and so on, they are practically synonymous. The Golden Rule of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is the same, even if worded slightly differently.

But for people who accept no transcendent traditional morality? It's every man for himself.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.